The following appeared on Page One of the
"Outlook" section of Sunday's Washington Post. It was written prior
to Newt Gingrich's announcement that he will resign from Congress, but a
mention of that news was added before it went to press. I'm sure the Post
won't mind if we reproduce the essay on this website, but if you want to see
it at the Post site, here is the address: <http://search.washingtonpostcom/wp-srvAVPlate/1998-ll/08/126M10898-idx,html>

That Sinking FeelingThe Party; With No Agenda, What Can
You Expect?By Jack Kemp Sunday, November 8, 1998; Page Cl

The 1998 midterm election was a referendum on Republican
performance, not on the impeachment issue or on either party's agenda for
1999. If it were either, voters would have granted Republicans a larger
majority or given control of Congress to the Democrats. What voters did was
withhold a larger majority from the Republicans and grant the GOP a second
chance to get its act together.

At the same time, the voters sent the
Republican Party several clear messages. First, a substantial number of
Republicans, frustrated with their party's long vacation in 1998, either
stayed home or voted Democratic. The electorate is practically shouting for
Republicans to finish the job Ronald Reagan began in reforming the tax and
regulatory apparatus. Instead, the party's cultural conservatives and
religious activists insisted that it was more important to avoid risky
reforms. They made the decision to sit on their hands, wait for a
cultural backlash and rely on voters to punish the Democratic party for
supporting a president who had misbehaved in his private life and lied about
it to a grand jury.

Second, after seeing that Republicans were willing
to put economic expansion at risk by betting on cultural issues, black and
Hispanic voters who have begun to inch their way into jobs that pay a living
wage voted overwhelmingly for Democrats (with a few exceptions). But minority
voters also showed a high degree of sophistication: They gave more support to
Republican governors who had cut taxes and practiced affirmative
outreach.

Third, too many of us in the party remained silent for too
long as the campaign went awry. We hoped that behind-the-scenes encouragement
might change the direction of the party's leaders in time to produce
meaningful legislative results. Throughout the summer, as I became
increasingly alarmed at the course of events, I made my concerns known
privately. I had come to believe that in promoting policies of fiscal
austerity, at home and abroad, President Clinton and congressional Republicans
were endangering Reagan's legacy: economic prosperity at home and the growth
of democratic capitalism around the globe.

Finally, on Oct. 8, I went
public with my concerns, warning that the Republican Party was adrift —
without an agenda and without purpose beyond its seeming preoccupation with
saving its congressional incumbents. The GOP leaders in Washington kept
saying, "Wait until next year," but I pointed out that voters may think that a
political party whose leaders are unwilling to risk losing a vote on principle
once it is in office is unworthy of winning the next election.

In all
honesty, I have to acknowledge that out of friendship to the party's
congressional leaders, I waited far too long before going public with my
criticisms. Thankfully, in spite of our shortcomings, the electorate found us
worthy enough to leave us in charge of the House and Senate, albeit with the
slimmest of margins.

In one sense, Republicans should be gratified.
Tuesday's results demonstrated the limitations of a political campaign built
around only cultural and social issues. It is impossible to separate the
culture from the economy; a strong culture requires a strong economy. Those
party intellectuals and opinion leaders who gambled this election on a
cultural backlash are now licking their wounds and pondering their failures.
There is absolutely a place for them in the party of Lincoln, but it can't be
in a dictatorial role. Conservative social engineering is every bit as
presumptuous as liberal social engineering.

Americans prefer to receive
their spiritual fulfillment in churches, synagogues and mosques. They are
conservative in their values but they want a progressive conservatism, not a
reactionary conservatism. I don't believe Americans want politicians and their
political parties to obfuscate on the hard questions of character or become
moral relativists in the process. Americans want their leaders to be
entrepreneurs of political ideals. And as any entrepreneur will attest, this
is not a business for the faint-hearted because the failure rate is so high.
But we can never forget Winston Churchill's admonition that defeat is never
fatal, victory is never final, it's courage that counts.

Where do we go
from here? I am convinced that Republicans can win the entrepreneurial
competition of ideas. Our disappointing performance last week demonstrates
that a failure to stand on principle is ultimately a losing strategy. No one
is more vengeful than voters who feel they have squandered their vote on
timid, disingenuous politicians.

We've had four years in the majority
with poor results. Federal taxes are at an all-time high, budget surpluses
loom as far as the eye can see, and we still haven't managed more than a token
reduction in tax rates. In the midst of this economic plenty, the lack of
employment and educational choice in our inner cities is
staggering.

This first weekend after Election Day '98 is too soon to be
suggesting a catalog of party positions for the 106th Congress. I think it's
enough to say that Republican congressional leaders, particularly Newt
Gingrich's successor as Speaker, need to put the president's special problems
out of their minds and into the hands of the House Judiciary Committee. They
can then tap the great pool of ideas that has been churning under their noses
since Reagan left office.

Reagan espoused a conservatism that was based
on traditional values and morality without legislating personal behavior. He
knew that economic growth, personal freedom and equality of opportunity will
allow America's faith-based institutions to thrive and provide a moral compass
without government interference. Republicans must now demonstrate to the
electorate—and especially to the minority communities—that we possess the
vision and strategy to help all people get a shot at the American
Dream.

Jack Kemp, the Republican vice-presidential nominee in 1996, is
co-director of Empower America.Copyright 1998 The Washington Post
Company